tv Newsmakers CSPAN July 20, 2014 6:00pm-6:31pm EDT
always that worry. i do not like having to go to a coequal branch of government to get back the power i should have in the first place. of theot have members house and senate standing up for article one. they are standing up for the party instead of the constitution. this lawsuit -- is it the best idea we have? it is one of the only we have left in the quiver. >> you look at the number of executive orders and compare obama to president bush and his had fewer. obama >> i am glad you mentioned that. orders are the area where we usually talk about executive overreach. case, he is obama's ignoring statutes and writing
things his own way. we would not be in the situation asay if republicans were tough on republican presidents as they have been on president obama. we would not be in this if democratstoday were as tough on president obama as they were on president bush. defending article one of the constitution is an obligation that the cut -- that the congress has. ort is a decade or two three. where are the daniel patrick moynihans? they put the constitution and the people's power ahead. sue mepresident says, so . what is your reaction? >> i hate that it has become so cavalier.
this is serious business. this is not partisan politics. this is about the coequal branches of government and the balance of power that the president had overstepped his bounds and what he was doing was unconstitutional. fromnot a word came out our democratic colleagues. >> stephen is the politics editor for the washington times. >> i wanted to follow-up. the republican leadership has go with aed to lawsuit over the employer
mandate. should there be other areas for the lawsuit? why only go with one and this specific one? do you support bringing articles of impeachment at this point? how does that tie in with this? >> let's start with the articles of impeachment. we have this every four years. the american people knew what they were getting into this last and all round -- around voted for president obama. i'm not trying to make a point. i am trying to make a difference. i do not see us going down that road. as for the lawsuit, i am glad that we narrowed it. we did this, not to make a point, to make a difference. you will not be able to get standing. it will look like a political stunt. if you narrow the grievances down and sue on a specific grievance, this will be the way
we get it through the courts. it is broader, in my mind, then the employer mandate. it is the affordable care act, in whole. we will talk about a variety of issues. this is not the republican house suing to stop the implementation of obamacare. the republican house suing to a choir the cquireentation -- aq the of limitation. -- implementation. >> there was a lot on the policies of not enforcing or using discretion. prosecutorial discretion seems to be ripe for asking the courts to rule on. would you prefer that challenge over obamacare? >> the answer to that is that
this is the president's language. if he did not want this language for obama care, he could have proposed different language. we would not have to change language. the bill was not ready for prime time and should not have ever been passed and signed by the --sident stop since it was by the president. since it was, the president cannot fix it through the executive process. the other issue that i disagree with were ideas. he does not want to follow the law. it is his law. he crafted this. he proposed this. if he does not think we crafted the law correctly, he needs to come back to congress and have us redo it. this is the four corners of what it means to have separation of powers. >> on the policy front, we have discussed the affordable care act.
i am curious. health care is an area in which house republicans have been criticized pretty consistently for not putting forward a clear and comprehensive alternative to the affordable care act. you are now taking over as chairman. a bill. forward there has been a long-running battle between leadership on whether this bill will ever reach the floor. your predecessor was an outspoken advocate on getting a vote for this bill. >> i appreciate you mentioning that. i absolutely am. a lot of people want to disparage and say that it is a group of people who say no. this is a group of people who want results for the families back home. thaneed look no further .he alternative there are areas where we concede
that the president has changed the hearts and minds of the american people. to bringa better way costs down in the system. there is absolutely a better way to make sure that people receive the care that they need and absolutely a way to make the true.ent's promise if you like your health insurance, you can keep it. you can expect more of the same from a. >> what are you going to do to push leadership? that is a source of frustration among your colleagues. you have a bill and the leadership has given it the red light. it will not see day on the floor. this would not be in constitutional crisis if republicans were tougher on republicans. we have to be careful how we push our ideas forward. we have not had a committee
markup and have not gone through the regular order process. it.,", "take it or leave that is not the way we like to operate. we want to bring a bill based on the rules. camp spent two years working on a tax reform alternative and cannot get it to the floor for a vote, either. this is us working together with others to move through the process. if the process leads to a bad product -- this is a good product. i want to see it move through regular order. >> the difference between health care reform and tax reform is that at the annual conference retreat, there was an ironclad commitment by leadership to get a vote on a health alternative this year in 2014 and now, you
are only looking at a few dozen legislative days remaining before the elections. is it feasible to expect that promise? creepy. it feels like you are looking into my heart and getting all of my hopes and passions. we made a commitment to do something and we ought to do it. keeping that commitment, there is a right way and a wrong way to do it. i do not want anybody to say sc cannot defend its ideas. our bill is fantastic. i want to see it go through the process and be made the best it can be made by all of our colleagues and then, i want to see it on the floor for a vote. we are driving the leadership to keep those promises and i might add that we have a brand-new member of congress taking over the floor schedule on the first day of august. kevin mccarthy. i can assure you he will hear from me on this issue.
>> congressman, i want to switch to another issue. rsc was influential in the budget appropriation process and the fact that we had a government shutdown. advocate fore or riders on obamacare in the appropriations process? are we heading for a government shutdown? there are a number of executive actions you are trying to push back on. that weect the premise add riders and it senses to a government shutdown. riders are a constitutional duty. constitutional obligation to protect the pursestrings. congressxactly what should be doing to control the
white house. let's look at the financial services appropriation bill, for example. in the three years i have been in congress, it hasn't been one. -- there hasn't been won. and yet, we did one this year with only four republicans voting no. not by going against the appropriators. we got involved in the framework to get our ideas included and make sure that the bill came out of committee as best as it could. we worked on the floor to improve it more. that leads to the successful passage of legislation. not stumbling blocks. what you can count on is getting in on the ground level to make sure that we get a product that can pass and that we can move forward for -- with. >> the question is, when you go .o conference
the conflict at that point. you mentioned the process early on and it is fascinating. it probably does change that part of that. how are you translating that to going behind closed doors and working it out. >> it is hard to imagine a that we areeport enthusiastic about. the senate believes a completely different thing about the future of the american economy then the rsc. our role is making sure the house product is the most conservative and thoughtful products that it can be, knowing it will be adulterated. if a report comes back and they cannot vote for it, that may be the way it has to be. if the democratic leadership has , they off on it, as well
will have an obligation. i would not have it said that the rsc has to vote no on a conference report. the opposite is true. working together to get that product in the conference, we are in the business of getting things going. i am proud of the people who worked to make that happen. obamacare wasith that the conference would not vote for it. the key question is, at that point in the process, will there be bills that lead us to a government shutdown question mark -- shutdown? >> if i could define what the president views as excess, -- success, the president would
love to see a government shutdown happen and blame republicans. that is not where we are headed. what you saw was a continuing resolution. is that theot hear senate has done nothing. we provided that house framework. an omnibusnd up with appropriation bill. our appropriation committee brings it so much of the language that we have hammered out together. say about ending up in the doom and gloom scenario. i know that the house has done -- work this summer to make prevent us from ending up there. if we end up there, it will be because of intransigence in the senate. not because the house. and itybody is talking
is at a new low. are both sides to blame? you still have to work with this president for the next two years. know, the running joke is that the secret service tried to grab someone climbing the fence at the white house and said, mr. president you still have two more years. want to do what my constituents sent me here to do. i know i am not going to get everything i want. i want to make some progress going forward. if you give republicans the senate in november the american people will do that. we will have a functioning article one process. we will have bills on the president desk.
he will sign them or veto them. we will begin to make this town work again. we will have the views of our founding fathers again. we have the higher more heroes act. if you're trying to hire veterans, those veterans won't count against your obamacare threshold. it passed the house 400 plus to one. it has not moved forward on the senate. that is a kind of bill we want to see on the president's desk. i think the president wants to sign that. i reject a narrative that we can't work with this president. harry reid is preventing us from find out if we can work with this president. >> is barack obama an effective president? >> i think he is got more of his agenda a compost and any other president in my lifetime. if you believe what he believes,
he has done an amazing amount. being effective in achieving his goals has done irreparable damage to the trust in this nation. it has not been a good thing for america. divided government gives us a chance to do big things. if we jim things through then people don't like it. we have serious problem's in this country. divided government gives us a shot at solving those problems. i don't want a president who wants to claim political points. i want him to work with me to do the big things that every american knows needs to be done. >> when we talk about the blame game in washington, there is plenty to go around.
part of the reason that washington has not worked is because of the infighting in the republican party. there was talk earlier this year of a shakeup in the leadership this november heading into the 114th congress. that came sooner than expected when the majority leader went down in his primary. there are some leadership elections. the expect there to be another hotly contacted leadership election in november for the speakership or majority leader? >> i hope so. i don't know when competition started to be a bad thing around here. the worst possible scenario is a bunch of republicans complaining that things were different but then not stepping up to make things different. >> that is what we saw a couple of weeks ago. >> a republican study committee chairman got elevated to the
elected leadership table. that does not happen regularly. i think it is healthy for this conference. you saw the majority leader's race. he said i am not going to be part of institution that anoints its next round of leaders. i will make sure there is a competitive collection and people have to be chosen rather than anointed. that is who we are. it is not supposed to be pretty. it is supposed to be down and dirty because we are fighting for america amongst ourselves. when we open up that conference door and walked out front, we try to be united to make a difference for the people we serve back home. >> as well liked as mr. scully's is, the role of the whip is not to determine policies as much as
it is to sell the agenda to the rest of the conference. are you satisfied as a conservative only having one of your guys in the whip post? would you like to see somebody take a shot at the mid jordi leader post or speakership? >> i would like to see more rock ribbed conservatives on the ballot in leadership positions. we have a lot of talent in this conference. i want to see that talent compete for the hearts and minds of the conference as a whole. let me push back on what his job is going to be as majority whip. he is not going to count the votes. his job is going to be to share with the leadership this is where you can get the votes if only you would be willing to do those kinds of things that are in concert with the principles
that most people share. that is what the leadership wants to do. they have a job to do. they want to see legislation move forward. they are not going to rally votes for a bad proposal. you don't have to work so hard to rally votes for it because it is art he captured them. >> i am looking for some intelligence here. are you going to look at the supplemental bill? what is your understanding of where this is going right now? will there be changes to the trafficking law in addition to the money in order to pass through the house? >> i don't think it is a litmus
test. if you're going to provide money to deal with a crisis then you need to provide a solution to prevent the crisis from continuing. that is something that has been so absent in the residence order conversation. he is good to identify problems. he is not good at identifying how they will solve those problems. that is what conservatives want. you will not find bigger hearts for children than what you find in the rsc. to simply feed someone today that allows supposed to die in the desert tomorrow does not satisfy our moral compass. we have got to solve that problem. the 2008 law is implicated in that. i would not tell you that i have a you must do this in order to get my vote. you must do something to stop
the problem and not just treat the problem. that is going to be the challenge. i have not booked my calendar to handle that. >> can i press you on one thing? so your colleagues have raised the idea of rolling back policies like deportation. do you think that should be attached to this spending bill? should that be rolled back through legislation? >> that is a great example of how irresponsible talk in washington has consequences. i see interviews that america's stance on excepting children has changed. they are ready to accept these kids will risk my child's life for transport into america. i think the law has a place for them.
the law does not have a place for them. we have to say that loud and clear. that does not provide that place. would that help distill some of the misinformation in central america? i think it would. we cannot get engaged in these hypotheticals. the president has dragged us down without those decisions having consequences. the consequences are tragically dangerous trips for children to the american border. we can do better as a country. >> i want to follow-up on the line about rock ribbed conservatives? >> is john boehner a rockribbed conservative? >> it is hard to come out of
ohio as a rockribbed conservative. he was in his first term. his job is different now. his job is to lead the entire house of representatives. that is a hard job on its easiest day. i admire him for the work that he has done. >> congressman rob woodall joined us. we continue the conversation. >> i think there has been for lack of a better term a blood thirst among conservatives in the conference for the last several years that have been officially this appointed with their leadership, especially from a strategic standpoint. they came to washington in 2010 to shake the place up. they were very aggressive on the policy front.
he raised the issue of tax reform. we heard about privacy bills rate in the nsa. those are the priorities coming into 2014. it became apparent about two or three weeks into 2014 that those bills would not see the light of day. conservatives attribute that to the uppermost echelon of the leadership. when mr. cantor goes down and he is replaced by mr. mccarthy, that does not appease the conservative bloodlust. does this satisfy some of these conservatives who for months and months and years have been scheming to infiltrate the upper echelon of leadership? probably not. we will hear about people taking
a crack at speaker boehner. there is going to be a lot of conservative support to find him. >> speaker boehner hinted that the immigration supplement may not go through both houses of congress before august. >> if i were guessing right now i would say that was a good bet. the president says he would be open to some of the changes to existing law. what you have seen in the last week or so is a dramatic backtracking by congressional democrats from those changes. that makes a huge difference. this issue turns the immigration policy that we of known for the last several years on its head. democrats were united in wanting a legalization bill and republicans were divided on that, in this instance you have
republicans united in saying we have to change the law and make people leave they can't get legal status or disappear into the shadows. democrats are now divided on some of that. others are saying we can't change the law that we have. we have to welcome these children and process them and treat them well. this is for humanitarian reasons. it is a difficult issue to solve. i would be surprised to see a deal gets done before they get home. >> i think from a republican standpoint you may be dealing with a half circle situation. that is probably the best case situation. speaker boehner adapts some of what the white house is asked for in terms of immigration funding. this is a number in the 50 to
75% range. >> i highly doubt you will get a majority of republicans on board. unless there are policy riders thatfically attached republicans have been unhappy with over the next several years. it is unlikely that the president will get what he asked for. memo gentlemen, thank you both for being with us. >> thank you. >> john quincy adams was the second adams to be elected to the white house. was the second northerner to be elected to the white house. ofwas only one